Liz Writes Life: Questions for KRRC

Tuesday

Dec 18, 2018 at 7:56 AM

Apparently, Klamath River Renewal Corp. didn’t like my comments in my column last week. In my old age, I have found I really don’t like debating issues. But, KRRC spokesman Matt Cox is just repeating the propaganda we have been hearing for years–and ignoring the real issues. So I must respond, because Klamath dam removal is not a done deal!

First, I will remind readers and KRRC that the residents in Siskiyou County are not stupid country bumpkins. Back on Nov. 2, 2010, there was ballot Measure G, sponsored by the Siskiyou Co. Water Users Assoc.. It asked the voters if they believed removal of four Klamath River hydro-electric dams was a good thing and 79 percent voted against dam removal.

Second, KRRC needs to show us the money. KRRC has received $25 million to do its propaganda. KRRC claims to have $398 million for dam removal. If it does, where did it come from, and into what account is it stored? From newest discussions, it looks like KRRCs estimated total cost of dam removal is millions short of the real cost. Does it have extra funds for this possibility? Where are they?

Third, show us the insurance policies and monies that will be readily available for liability. Are they now in place? In Cox’s rebutal to me, he said they will “soon” have the “guaranteed maximum price contract with a selected design build firm.” This is my point: At this moment, KRRC does not have the funds needed for dam destruction or the must have liability insurance. Again, Klamath dam removal is not a done deal. Do not believe the propaganda.

Fourth, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is now the sole decision maker regarding KRRCs proposed purchase of the regulatory energy licenses from PacifiCorp that would enable KRRC to remove the four Klamath hydro-electric dams. FERC has not made that decision. Dam removal is not a done deal. FERC is raising significant issues brought forth by Siskiyou County and interveners, who submitted detailed documents and letters. And, from what I have been able to ascertain, KRRC has yet to provide detailed answers to these issues. As I said in last week’s column: “A FERC engineer is actively challenging KRRC on its basic information and assumptions.” So, again, Klamath dam removal is not a done deal.

Fifth, what are interveners? These groups or individuals have joined a plaintiff in litigation. Loy Beardsmore is a resident with a home in the Copco area, where the proposed removal of dams will occur. She has done the legal work to become an intervener. Loy has raised significant questions and even went to Washington D.C., last month, to press her concerns with government agencies. I talked with Loy and asked why she is so adamant against removal of the dams. Here are her responses to my questions. “I felt an enormous responsibility to represent the people that live around Copco. I wanted to give the White House and the DOI (Department of Interior) a personal connection to the effects that this entire process is having on the residents around Copco, Irongate and Siskiyou County,” Loy said.

Through our two Siskiyou County Supervisors’, Chairman Ray Haupt and Lisa Nixon, trip to Washington D.C. in early November, Loy was able to meet with an Associate Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and a Special Assistant of Intergovernmental and External Affairs. Yep, these are fairly important people in President Trump’s White House administration that deal directly with agencies like the Dept. of Interior. Loy gave, both verbally and with her documents, her rebuttal to KRRCs Definite Plan for Klamath dams removal. She provided photos that show the instability of slopes and the dry landscape. Loy explained how property values truly have plummeted in the area, including her own house. There is the real possibility of home owners losing the water in their wells, when the reservoirs behind the dams are gone. KRRC is trying to do studies on this possibility, but Loy said KRRC has yet to address how KRRC will realistically fix this problem. She said KRRC has suggested hauling water to above-ground storage tanks. For how long? And who will pay the cost of the additional electricity to pump and haul this water?

The Paradise Camp Fire was fresh in everyone’s minds, when Loy was in WA D.C. She asked about fire mitigation and questioned KRRCs fire management plan of using dry fire hydrants, pipes to the river and a pumper truck to suck up water to fight potential fires. This may look good on paper, but is not realistic. The reservoirs, behind the dams, are needed for aerial firefighting and pumping of water. Actually, that is Loy’s biggest concern – what is realistic? What really will happen, when the four dams are destroyed? Loy and Siskiyou County and the Siskiyou Co. Water Users Assoc. have responded to KRRCs Definite Plan and allege there are vast amounts of incorrect information and assumptions. Loy said numerous aspects of KRRCs Definite Plan utilized old data from 2010-2011, which refers to the defunct Klamath Basin Restoration Plan. The fact that KRRC has not updated its facts, science, financial data and liability costs is appalling. Propaganda, rhetoric and pie-in-the sky dreams are not answers. They are not facts. They are not realistic.

What is credible is that White House officials and FERC are now listening to Loy, other interveners and to Siskiyou County. Loy and our county have received additional phone calls and communications from the White House and DOI higher-ups. If you have realistic concerns about environmental, financial, fire management and other data Klamath dam removal, Loy encourages you to write FERC.

Liz Bowen began writing ranch and farm news, published in newspapers, in 1976. She is a native of Siskiyou County and lives near Callahan. Call her at 530-467-3515. Check out her blog at: LizWritesLife.blogspot.com.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.